Would it be insane to actually talk about the book this thread is named for at this point?

I finished reading it a few days ago. Although I didn't think the book as a whole was quite as fabulous as the original first three chapters, I did think it very funny and it kept my interest, which is pretty rare for a full-length parody.

I'm kind of sorry that there's a sequel planned though; that seems overdoing it to me. Though who knows, maybe he'll pull it off.

If you'd like to see some quotes, there are some in my review at GoodReads and in many of the other reviews as well. Checking them out is probably the best way to see if the humor would appeal to you._________________"'Happily ever after, or even just together ever after, is not cheesy,' Wren said. 'It's the noblest, like, the most courageous thing two people can shoot for.'" -- Fangirl by Rainbow Rowell

Would it be insane to actually talk about the book this thread is named for at this point?

I finished reading it a few days ago. Although I didn't think the book as a whole was quite as fabulous as the original first three chapters, I did think it very funny and it kept my interest, which is pretty rare for a full-length parody.

I'm kind of sorry that there's a sequel planned though; that seems overdoing it to me. Though who knows, maybe he'll pull it off.

If you'd like to see some quotes, there are some in my review at GoodReads and in many of the other reviews as well. Checking them out is probably the best way to see if the humor would appeal to you.

The quotes I've seen were pretty hilarious(the tailored condoms just kill me), but I was wondering how a whole book would be. Even though I just couldn't make it all the way through the original 50 Shades, I could still follow at least the parts of the parody I've seen so far. And I can see not being sure about a sequel - sometimes that feels like taking a good joke and letting it go on for far too long.

First of all, to dick and Kristie J: If you don't want to read this thread, then don't. Start another thread. Add a post to another, both of you have been around AAR long enough to know how the message board works. But this much is a fact: We have never stifled reader discussion at AAR and we're not going to start today just because some posters don't like it.

This is an excellent example IMO of lack of balance on your part: You singled out dick and Kristie here without (a) ever having mentioned those other names yet, you know whom, and (b) you're apparently not hearing people's weariness and/or exasperation with both the 50 topic itself and the 'tudes that flow from it that can permeate the rest of the boards' other topics.

Quote:

Secondly, this thread when not out right aggressive has devolved into an exercise in passive-aggressiveness that I can't defend either. So, I'm going to ask everyone to take a deep breath before posting. Our boards are not especially friendly and welcoming these days and I'd like that to stop.

Everyone agrees obviously with not liking the tone of the boards. So why didn't you take a deep breath yourself before singling out dick and Kristie? That would have been a good example.

Quote:

In the long history of the Interwebs, the flounce has become very familiar. Some who flounce off come back. Others don't. It is what it is.

This, directly after the deep breath comment, underlines again a part of the problem. If you don't demonstrate deep breaths yourself and show non-partiality to posters, how can you expect others to? I gather I'm the "flounce"? If you did mean me, my extending good wishes was intended for the atmosphere of the boards to change; the sentence prior to the good luck was about board problems. Even if it's not me, why go there -- especially now?

While I appreciate other posters speaking out too--it was unexpected, I believe when they have used my name, though, they were referring to the problems themselves and not just some issue I had. To repeat the issues: people are tired of 50 in general over all of the other books out there, like it or not; they're tired of the kinds of posts made by 50 lovers being made all over the boards; and they're tired of partiality toward the 50 group. That's how I read it anyway.

Quote:

Ultimately, this is a message board about romance novels. If this has become more to anyone than that, maybe it is time to take a step back.

JMO but posters are indeed talking about focus on all romance novels and not just one particular set of books that has effected the whole board(s) and not just a single thread.

They strike me as being very squealy fan girlish over one book in particular and I don’t really see any point in anyone posting about anything else as all other conversations are drowned out by these two, despite their "permission" for us to post on another topic. Of course whatever other topic is brought up with be drowned out by the 50 group. But what I find very sad is the passive aggressive, hostile attitude that the most frequent poster and her 'second in command' has. She makes no bones about her disdain for what she calls “mean girl bloggers” while at the same time is completely oblivious to how her own attitudes come across.

.

.

I had a post written this morning, but deleted it. I'm going to try one more time, because Kristie's post is addressing me. Kristie, I don't know where you get the idea that I am taking over the boards in any way. I post on the Fifty Shades thread often. So what? I don't post all over the board taking over the threads. Now that would be taking over the board. I really don't understand why you visit a thread that irks you so and I don't understand your reasoning at all. And furthermore, I haven't mentioned mean girl bloggers, as you say, in a long while. I actually do have a blog now, but it isn't a book blog. I enjoy it very much. I haven't read the book in this thread, so I won't be visting this particular thread again. See how easy that is? And no, that is not snarky. That is common sense._________________"As you wish"
~The Princess Bride

Eliza,
You are over analyzing. I singled out dick and Kristie because they had both recently posted. That is it. Points have been made and the ground sufficiently covered. I am out.

I disagree obviously, and of course you're entitled to just dismiss me yet again. But you're not solving the off-tone of the boards by doing so IMO, and I still think you're not hearing and addressing issues, which dismisses them too.

Eliza, one thing I am not is a liar. After lecturing me so roundly, thanks for calling me one on our AAR boards.

I never called you that or ever implied it, and you know it. I stated plainly my disagreement with what you said and actions you took and that's it.

After your "taking a deep breath" comment, you referred consciously or unconsciously to a poster leaving as a "flounce" when most would have just used the word leave or left. That word choice, along with "over analyzing"
displays an attitude or a position of dismissal, and that too is it.

More and more I am saddened at what I see happening here at AAR. This site has made such a tremendous difference in my life but more and more now I see the boards, especially this one, being hijacked by one or two posters in particular. They seem to think they speak for the majority of AAR visitors but they certainly DO NOT speak for me. They strike me as being very squealy fan girlish over one book in particular and I don’t really see any point in anyone posting about anything else as all other conversations are drowned out by these two, despite their "permission" for us to post on another topic. Of course whatever other topic is brought up with be drowned out by the 50 group. But what I find very sad is the passive aggressive, hostile attitude that the most frequent poster and her 'second in command' has. She makes no bones about her disdain for what she calls “mean girl bloggers” while at the same time is completely oblivious to how her own attitudes come across.

I’ve debated for quite some time now on whether to ‘say’ anything. In fact I was even talking to my sister about my frustration coming here anymore and she asked why I did. It’s because not so very long ago I loved this site and there are still so many things and posters I appreciate. But more and more often I’m finding myself frustrated by the thread that drowns out all others and the main people who keep it going. I’ve said it before that even with the very bestest book in the entire whole wide world that was ever written, I would give up discussion after a while.

What I also feel very sad about is rather than say anything to those posters who treat AAR as their own personal playing ground; who boot out anyone else who doesn't agree with them; who dare to question the 50 Shades obsession, the administration finally speaks up, not about their subversive hostile behaviour, but rather feels the need to take to task a poster who has the gall to say something about greed in America (hello - can we say Kardasian?)

I think we are starting to see those of us who have visited and loved this site for years finally voicing our 'distress' over what is currently going on; over why two posters in particular are so in love with seeing the huge numbers of posts, that they feel the need to post 2, 3, 4 or more posts in a row rather than addressing a number of different issues all in the same post.

I know that freedom of speech is important and any kind of censorship is a bit bugaboo - but as far as I'm concerned enough is enough. If those who feel the need to still carry on the 50 Shades minutia that is making me (and apparently others ) want to scream, take it off site and let the rest of us get on with other topics and not come here and see the 50 Shades thread yet again at the top of the ladder.

This is not the same place as it used to be a few short years ago and I am very distressed by that.

I'm afraid I couldn't agree more. I've been coming here from the very beginning of AAR, so I've been here through many a kerfuffle. Lately, though, every visit makes me so annoyed that I'm coming less and less often, and considering just deleting the link from my favourites, where it's been for over 15 years. Sandy, with the tact that characterises her, might call this a flounce. To me, it feels more like leaving a relationship that was once wonderful but has gone sour, and that makes me very sad.

To be clear, this is not about the 50 shades threads, although they are a very good example of what's gone wrong. Any time a potentially interesting discussion starts, it's immediately taken over by xina and Linda (let's name them, shall we, since we all know who we mean), posting cliquey little one-liners for each other, being passive-aggressively rude to other posters and sidelining them, and making dismissive references to "those blogs" whenever there's even the slightest connection. And if anyone dares object, in comes Sandy to defend them with a heavy hand. I've tried to ignore the threads I think might annoy me, and I've even tried to just skip over their posts when I see them posting in a thread I'm interested in. It doesn't work.

I debated whether to post anything at all, or just delete the link from my browser and be done with it. I suspect all I'm going to get for this is a "don't let the door hit you on your way out, when you leave in a flounce". So be it. AAR has been a part of my life for so long that it felt wrong not to say something._________________My Reading Journal
http://rosario.blogspot.com

Rosario - I'm sorry you feel that way. I've loved your blog, and you and Kristie(J) have both been valued posters here at AAR for as long as I've been around. I've seen internet kerfuffles come and go, and that makes me appreciate your levelheadedness even more. I can't speak for everyone, but I do agree with you that a little less of the snarkiness on the message boards would be nice. I do hope you'll stay, since I know you contribute a lot to discussions when you post.

I've been around for a while, too, and for what it's worth, I intend to keep posting. I don't take offense too readily and when I do, I try to be polite about it. Although I appreciate Eliza's post, I also didn't take offense at Sandy's suggestion that I not read the FSOG thread. (Actually, I'd already ceased reading it, for the most part.)

Maybe we could all--50 shaders and anti 50-shaders and the uncommited either way--back off for a while and let the kerfuffle go the way of kerfuffles?

I've been around for a while, too, and for what it's worth, I intend to keep posting. I don't take offense too readily and when I do, I try to be polite about it. Although I appreciate Eliza's post, I also didn't take offense at Sandy's suggestion that I not read the FSOG thread. (Actually, I'd already ceased reading it, for the most part.)

Maybe we could all--50 shaders and anti 50-shaders and the uncommited either way--back off for a while and let the kerfuffle go the way of kerfuffles?

dick, I think that is an excellent suggestion._________________Sandy AAR
Publisher and Senior Editor

Maybe we could all--50 shaders and anti 50-shaders and the uncommited either way--back off for a while and let the kerfuffle go the way of kerfuffles?

Yes--a sensible voice in the wilderness. But even as we say that and for future threads, there's room for everyone's opinions. At the same time, we can choose to ignore those threads that don't have any personal appeal rather than throwing stones at them.